Tanabodee J.,Chonburi Cancer Hospital |
Thepsuwan K.,Chonburi Cancer Hospital |
Karalak A.,National Cancer Institute |
Laoaree O.,Chonburi Cancer Hospital |
And 3 more authors.
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention | Year: 2015
This study was conducted to 1206 women who had cervical cancer screening at Chonburi Cancer Hospital. The spilt-sample study aimed to compare the efficacy of abnormal cervical cells detection between liquid-based cytology (LBC) and conventional cytology (CC). The collection of cervical cells was performed by broom and directly smeared on a glass slide for CC then the rest of specimen was prepared for LBC. All slides were evaluated and classified by The Bethesda System. The results of the two cytological tests were compared to the gold standard. The LBC smear significantly decreased inflammatory cell and thick smear on slides. These two techniques were not difference in detection rate of abnormal cytology and had high cytological diagnostic agreement of 95.7%. The histologic diagnosis of cervical tissue was used as the gold standard in 103 cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, false positive, false negative and accuracy of LBC at ASC-US cut offwere 81.4, 75.0, 70.0, 84.9, 25.0, 18.6 and 77.7%, respectively. CC had higher false positive and false negative than LBC. LBC had shown higher sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy than CC but no statistical significance. In conclusion, LBC method can improve specimen quality, more sensitive, specific and accurate at ASC-US cut offand as effective as CC in detecting cervical epithelial cell abnormalities.
Kimman M.,University of Sydney |
Kimman M.,Maastricht University |
Jan S.,University of Sydney |
Yip C.H.,University of Kuala Lumpur |
And 73 more authors.
BMC Medicine | Year: 2015
Background: One of the biggest obstacles to developing policies in cancer care in Southeast Asia is lack of reliable data on disease burden and economic consequences. In 2012, we instigated a study of new cancer patients in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region - the Asean CosTs In ONcology (ACTION) study - to assess the economic impact of cancer. Methods: The ACTION study is a prospective longitudinal study of 9,513 consecutively recruited adult patients with an initial diagnosis of cancer. Twelve months after diagnosis, we recorded death and household financial catastrophe (out-of-pocket medical costs exceeding 30 % of annual household income). We assessed the effect on these two outcomes of a range of socio-demographic, clinical, and economic predictors using a multinomial regression model. Results: The mean age of participants was 52 years; 64 % were women. A year after diagnosis, 29 % had died, 48 % experienced financial catastrophe, and just 23 % were alive with no financial catastrophe. The risk of dying from cancer and facing catastrophic payments was associated with clinical variables, such as a more advanced disease stage at diagnosis, and socioeconomic status pre-diagnosis. Participants in the low income category within each country had significantly higher odds of financial catastrophe (odds ratio, 5.86; 95 % confidence interval, 4.76-7.23) and death (5.52; 4.34-7.02) than participants with high income. Those without insurance were also more likely to experience financial catastrophe (1.27; 1.05-1.52) and die (1.51; 1.21-1.88) than participants with insurance. Conclusions: A cancer diagnosis in Southeast Asia is potentially disastrous, with over 75 % of patients experiencing death or financial catastrophe within one year. This study adds compelling evidence to the argument for policies that improve access to care and provide adequate financial protection from the costs of illness. © 2015 The ACTION Study Group.